On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 07:25:31 -0700
Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]> wrote:
> I don't say the current proposed code is the answer but iff
> Davide's unified code does not perform worse than the current code I
> don't see the harm since, for instance, extending socket() is in any
> case necessary. I mentioned that close_on_exit must be set on open,
> else leaks are risked. This will come naturally with a flags parameter
> which already takes O_NONSEQFD.
Yes, and for completeness :
accept2(int fd, ...)
pipe2(int *fds, int oflags);
eventfd2(int count, int oflags);
signalfd2(int ufd, sigset_t __user *user_mask, size_t sizemask, int oflags);
timerfd2(int ufd, int clockid, int flags,const struct itimerspec __user *utmr, int oflags) ...
We probably should name those with a better sufix than "2", it is ugly.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
